Technology Roadmapping and the Technology Mechanism

Transcription

1 Technology Roadmapping and the Technology Mechanism Technology roadmaps related to climate change' Marc Londo, ECN Bonn March 25,

2 Contents Highlights of the background paper for the TEC Some thoughts on TRMs and adaptation

3 What are Technology Roadmaps? A Technology Roadmap (TRM) serves as a coherent basis for specific technology development and transfer activities, providing a common (preferably quantifiable) objective, time-specific milestones and a consistent set of concrete actions; and is developed jointly with relevant stakeholders, who commit to their roles in the TRM implementation.

4 What are technology roadmaps? Strategic planning tool in development and diffusion of technologies At corporate level (its origin) At sector level For (supra)national innovation policy Not strictly defined: open, flexible In scope In process In result Common objectives: Provide strategic focus, Mobilise relevant actors/stakeholders Create coherence in their actions

5 Evaluating Technology Roadmaps What is a quality roadmap? Process Document Visual Representation Evaluation criteria: Credibility Desirability Utility Adaptability

6 Possible relation with TEC and Technology Transfer Safeguard demand-driven nature of TT Improve coherence in TT activities Improve stakeholder support and engagement (private and public parties) Follow-up to TNAs?

7 TRM review for TEC Inventory and selection of TRMs on climate change mitigation and adaptation technologies: 159 documents Matrix 1 Summary Analysis: Technology Geographical source Geographical coverage Year of publication Time horizon Authoring organisation Substantive elements Process description Specs. of engaged stakeholders Quantifiable targets Actions assigned Visual representation Plan for update Geographical Source International Annex I Non Annex I Total A1. Renewable Energy A2. Other Energy B. Transportation C. Buildings D. Industry E. Agriculture F. Waste Management G. Adaptation H. Geoengineering Total

8 Key findings Mitigation technologies dominate over adaptation Geographical source: Annex-1 countries and IGOs TRMs on renewables energy technologies more recent than others IGO and Industry main authors Very few quality TRMs (based on six substantive elements) Need for guidance in order to improve the quality of TRMs. Technology Substantive Elements Process Stakeholders Targets Actions Visual Update All TRMs 32% 36% 60% 54% 40% 9% A1. Renewable Energy 23% 14% 61% 55% 43% 9% A2. Other Energy 31% 40% 55% 46% 45% 6% B. Transportation 37% 49% 66% 51% 31% 9% C. Buildings 44% 56% 44% 38% 56% 0% D. Industry 64% 64% 71% 64% 57% 7% E. Agriculture 100% 67% 0% 33% 33% 0% F. Waste Management 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% G. Adaptation 36% 55% 82% 55% 9% 27% H. Geoengineering 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%

9 Good practice examples IEA: Comprehensive set of consistent TRMs, Guidance document Various good elements in several TRMs identified

10

11 Further conclusions Advantages of using TRMs Particularly suitable for technology management and related policy The strong consensus-building element useful for CTC&N? Flexibility, adaptability: strength for Technology Mechanism with diversity of country contexts and technologies Limitations of using TRMs Risk of lock-in or tunnel vision through consensus building. Alignment with existing (governmental) plans and strategies. Create culture of openness Follow-up: iteration, refinement, monitoring, updating outcomes Integration with broader policy strategy

12 Profile of adaptation TRMs Only 11 out of 159 Water resources (8) Coastal zones (1) Public health (1) Generic (1) OECD: 5 Various techs. Relatively elaborate Non-OECD: 5 All on water Relatively concise

13 Why so few adaptation TRMs? Not analysed thoroughly, but speculating: Generally more attention for mitigation Less prominent role of technology (development) Underrepresentation in our selection? Hidden adaptation TRMs? Not explicitly climate change Not explicitly adaptation Not explicitly TRM

14 However, adaptation TRMs could be very useful Tech transfer in broad sense Importance of knowing context and capabilities in receiving country Stakeholder engagement on both sides So: A case for the TEC!

15 Thank you for your attention Marc Londo (ECN) Elliott More (IfM) Rob Phaal (IfM) Laura Würtenberger (ECN) ECN Westerduinweg 3 P.O. Box LE Petten 1755 ZG Petten The Netherlands The Netherlands T F info@ecn.nl University of Cambridge Institute for Manufacturing 17 Charles Babbage Road Cambridge CB3 0FS UK T +44 (0)